Enlaces 13//03//2017

Urbanismo :: teorizando las infraestructuras globales (bibliografía incluida) (Medium) // ecofascismo (EdsElSalmon) // Casas modulares: el Kiosk K67 del diseñador esloveno Saša J. Mächtig (ArchDaily) // Patrik Schumacher, director de Zaha Hadid Architects, sobre su evolucion ideológica, el urbanismo paramétrico, y la politización de la arquitectura (Aft3r)

Economía :: Recursos de Nick Land para investigar sobre Bitcoin (UrbanFuture) // la falsedad de la gran depresión (OutsideIn) // sobre las crisis en un sistema económico frágil (WEAPedagogy) // Penny Stocks Investments (+) // Sinofuturismo (1839 – 2046 AD) (Vimeo) // Ética de negocios (PlatoStanford) //

Tecnología :: desarrollos en materia programable (Discover) // El orden de las técnicas: sobre Lewis Mumford, por Edmund Berger (DeterritorialInvestigations) + distinción entre mercados y capitalismo en D&G // Transhumanistas otra vez (TheVerge) // Jean Luc Nancy sobre la maquinaria tecno-económica (Youtube) // Robot controlado con ondas cerebrales (YouTube) // La TechnoSphere Magazine, esta vez sobre las antropo-técnicas (+) //

Computación :: entrevista a Yuk Hui sobre los objetos digitales y los esquemas de metadata (NetCritique) // análisis de datos en twitter: CONICET vs. PRO (LaCajaYElGato) // La diferencia entre Google y Apple en términos de patentes (FastCoDesign) // Efectividad de las redes neuronales recurrentes, de Andrej Karpathy (Github) // El Criptóptico como máquina de vigilancia invisible (DataJustice) // Sobre los virus en GNU Linux (DesdeLinux) // Sobre los derechos de las máquinas del futuro (Youtube) //

Política :: la democracia como ‘no siendo el mejor sistema’ (OutsideIn) // Hardt, sobre el liderazgo (BecomingPoor) //

Filosofía :: Kantianismo robótico (UrbanFuture) // ¿La CIA leyendo teoría francesa? No (ThePhilosophicalSalon) // Capitalismo de Plataformas via Facebook, por Tiziana Terranova (TechnoCulture) // Llamada a ponencias para el Coloquio Internacional de Filosofía de la Técnica en Mar del Plata (+) // Esquemas de filosofía (Pinterest) // Lectura de las ‘cartas ópticas’ de Spinoza (Frames/Sing en MitocondrialVertigo otro blog del autor + PerverseEgalitarianism) // Página de CTheory, revista canadiense de ciencias sociales, cibernetica, filosofía y política (+) // “Maurice Blanchot”, la película de Hugo Santiago (Vimeo) // “Simondon du desert”, documental (Vimeo) //

 Ciencias :: Sobre el olvido como factor creativo para las ciencias (bldgBlog) // Acerca de la disputa reduccionismo-emergencia en biología (Cultura científica, serie: 1 2 3 4 5 6) // El MIT dice haber encontrado los universales del lenguaje de los que hablaba Chomsky (ArsTechnica) // Sobre los problemas de (im)precisión de las ciencias (ArsTechnica) // Página del seminario de Historia y Filosofía de la Ciencia de la Universidad de Antioquia (+) // Sobre producir o perecer en el mundo de las ciencias (Microsiervos) // Historia de la racionalidad científica (PlatoStanford) //

Biología :: Sobre la optogenética (Wiki) //

Física cuántica :: Mecánica cuántica (+), Cuestiones filosóficas (+), Postulados (+), Mecánica matricial (+), Espacio de Hilbert (+), Interpretación relacional (+), No causalidad (+), Interpretación bayesiana y pragmatista (+), Interpretación modal (+) //

Misc :: La lectura como hábito (LifeHacker) // Hápax (Wiki) // Cormac MacCarthy sobre no trabajar (OpenCulture) //


Círculos animales

2:53 19/01/2017
Patrones circulares en distintos lugares formados por confluctos entre plantas e insectos.

“All over the globe, plants are growing into strange, circular patterns / These crop circle patterns emerge when plants and bugs compete for resources.
(…) in the Namib Desert of Africa, they’re called “fairy circles;” in Brazil they’re dubbed “murundus,” and in North America they’re known as “Mima mounds.” In a recent paper for Nature, Princeton ecologist Corina E. Tarnita and her colleagues call them “landscapes of overdispersed (evenly spaced) elements.” All are regions where plants grow into such perfectly symmetrical, large-scale patterns that they seem unnatural.
(…) Two of the leading hypotheses involve plant cooperation and insect rivalries. In areas where water resources are scarce or irregular, plants are known to engage in “scale-dependent feedbacks,” where plants over a wide area grow into clusters rather than spreading out over a big area. The plant clumps limit their sizes to make the best use of water, and this strategy leads to reproductive success. It also might explain why we see patterns of plant growth that are characteristic of fairy circles and Mima mounds.
But some scientists who have studied the pattern say that more is going on. They argue that water resources in these areas are being divvied up by warring groups of termites who suctioned water out of the dry areas and relocated it to their mounds. Given that successful termite colonies tend to have territory sizes that are roughly comparable, this would explain why so many of these odd regions contain mounds as well as dry patches.
Tarnita and her colleagues’ paper in Nature suggests that we’re probably seeing an unusual interaction between plants and termites, both attempting to maintain access to water in dry areas. Using a computer model that accounted for both plant and insect life cycles, the researchers were able to reproduce the exact patterns we see in fairy circles. Speaking to the Washington Post’s Sarah Kaplan, Tarnita marveled, “It’s an amazing thing that you can get such clean, beautiful geometric patterns. Such tiny creatures doing their thing very locally every day end up producing these unbelievable large-scale patterns… To me, it’s mind-boggling that nature can do that.” Kaplan added that Princeton chemist Salvatore Torquato identified the fairy circle patterns as “hyperuniform,” a state often seen in substances whose semi-organized atomic structure puts them halfway between a crystal and a liquid.
Though we may not yet know for certain what kinds of interactions cause these eerily regular landscapes, Tarnita and her colleagues’ model brings us one step closer. They argue that we are just at the dawn of understanding ecological self-organization, partly because satellite imagery makes it easier to see features like fairy circles. But we’re only beginning to understand the way communities of lifeforms interact to produce such oddly partitioned environments.


20:04 16/01/2017
Robert Epstein:

My favourite example of the dramatic difference between the IP perspective and what some now call the ‘anti-representational’ view of human functioning involves two different ways of explaining how a baseball player manages to catch a fly ball – beautifully explicated by Michael McBeath, now at Arizona State University, and his colleagues in a 1995 paper in Science. The IP perspective requires the player to formulate an estimate of various initial conditions of the ball’s flight – the force of the impact, the angle of the trajectory, that kind of thing – then to create and analyse an internal model of the path along which the ball will likely move, then to use that model to guide and adjust motor movements continuously in time in order to intercept the ball.
That is all well and good if we functioned as computers do, but McBeath and his colleagues gave a simpler account: to catch the ball, the player simply needs to keep moving in a way that keeps the ball in a constant visual relationship with respect to home plate and the surrounding scenery (technically, in a ‘linear optical trajectory’). This might sound complicated, but it is actually incredibly simple, and completely free of computations, representations and algorithms.
Worse still, even if we had the ability to take a snapshot of all of the brain’s 86 billion neurons and then to simulate the state of those neurons in a computer, that vast pattern would mean nothing outside the body of the brain that produced it. This is perhaps the most egregious way in which the IP metaphor has distorted our thinking about human functioning. Whereas computers do store exact copies of data – copies that can persist unchanged for long periods of time, even if the power has been turned off – the brain maintains our intellect only as long as it remains alive. There is no on-off switch. Either the brain keeps functioning, or we disappear. What’s more, as the neurobiologist Steven Rose pointed out in The Future of the Brain (2005), a snapshot of the brain’s current state might also be meaningless unless we knew the entire life history of that brain’s owner – perhaps even about the social context in which he or she was raised.

Blog sobre la postura antirepresentacional: http://psychsciencenotes.blogspot.com/p/about-us.html
Revisar los estudios sobre la memoria, por todo el asunto de qué tan posible es descargar la memoria a una base de datos externa.


19:50 16/01/2017

Lista de libros y autores en un artículo de aeon sobre neurociencias:

In Our Own Image (2015), George Zarkadakis
Language and Communication (1951), George Miller.
The Computer and the Brain (1958), John von Neumann
How to Create a Mind: The Secret of Human Thought Revealed (2013), Ray Kurzweil
Radical Embodied Cognitive Science (2009), Anthony Chemero
Transcendence (2014) (película) starring Johnny Depp
Remembering (1932), Frederic Bartlett
The Future of the Brain (2005), Steven Rose

Michael McBeath, futurist Kurzweil, physicist Stephen Hawking, neuroscientist Randal Koene, Eric Kandel, Kenneth Miller

13:57 25/11/2016


Pavel Kroupa, profesor de astrofísica de la Universidad de Bonn, Alemania.

Posiblemente la inculsion de la materia negra sea, como supuse, un postulado metafísico dogmático. Debería darse un nombre nuevo a esta cuestión. Una de las cosas que suele estar en juego son los ‘grants’ (becas de investigación)… ¿por qué deberían pagarnos por investigar? ¿Somos una parte importante del Estado?

21:51 20/11/2016
genetica + geopolitica


Filosofia de la tecnica_filosofia de la ciencia_filosofia politica
idea_Los contenidos de cada ciencia revelan un ambito de operacion ingenieril a partir de la cual operan los poderes. a=cuantica, computacion, ciberseguridad; b=genetica, tecnomedicina, biopolitica; c=neurociencia, realidad virtual-aumentada, neuropolitica; d=economia, computacion y mgmt, neoliberalismo/ciberliberalismo; genética, especiacion, evolucion.